ACLU Fights for Green Card Holder’s Release from Kentucky Detention

ACLU Challenges Detention of Green Card Holder in Kentucky

The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has filed a federal habeas petition seeking the release of Beata Siemionkowicz, a lawful permanent resident who has been held in immigration detention for over a year. The petition, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Kentucky, argues that her continued detention violates her constitutional rights. Siemionkowicz, who has lived in the United States since 1995, was taken into custody by Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in August 2025 and has remained at the Campbell County Detention Center in Kentucky since then.

The core of the ACLU’s argument centers on the burden of proof in detention proceedings. The petition contends that the government has failed to demonstrate, by clear and convincing evidence, that Siemionkowicz poses a danger to the community or is a flight risk. This assertion challenges the basis of her prolonged detention and the process by which her bond was denied. The ACLU is asking the court to either order her immediate release or mandate a new bond hearing where the government would be required to justify her continued custody.

The Legal Dispute Over Detention Justification

The legal battle hinges on who bears the responsibility for proving whether an individual should remain in immigration detention. Typically, in bond hearings, the government must present evidence to show that a person is a danger or a flight risk. However, the ACLU alleges that in Siemionkowicz’s case, the immigration judge improperly shifted this burden onto her, requiring her to prove she was not a risk. This, the ACLU argues, is a violation of her Fifth Amendment due process rights.

Habeas corpus is a legal action that allows a detained person to challenge the legality of their confinement. The ACLU’s filing uses this mechanism to question not only the length of Siemionkowicz’s detention but also the fairness of the bond hearing process. The complaint specifically states that holding her for over 12 months without the government establishing clear and convincing evidence of her being a danger or flight risk is a violation of her constitutional rights. The case names the jailer of the detention center and several federal immigration officials as respondents.

Siemionkowicz’s Background and the Timeline of Detention

Beata Siemionkowicz is identified as a native and citizen of Poland who arrived in the United States in 1995. She has resided in the U.S. continuously since then. Her detention began in August 2025 when ICE apprehended her at her daughter’s home. The detention is taking place in Kentucky, while the initial bond decision was made by an immigration judge in Memphis. The federal court case is now proceeding in the Eastern District of Kentucky, with the ACLU of Illinois and the ACLU of Kentucky collaborating on the legal action.

The ACLU emphasizes that the constitutional system places the burden of justifying prolonged and potentially oppressive detention on the government, not on the individual facing such confinement. They argue that the government’s desire to detain someone should not automatically place the responsibility on that individual to prove their innocence or lack of risk. This principle is central to their challenge against Siemionkowicz’s year-long incarceration.

Potential Outcomes for Siemionkowicz’s Case

The federal court has been presented with two primary avenues for resolution. The court could order Siemionkowicz’s immediate release from detention. Alternatively, it could mandate a new bond hearing. In this new hearing, the government would be compelled to present its case and justify why Siemionkowicz should continue to be held in custody. The ACLU’s petition is not seeking a simple administrative review; it is asking the federal court to address the alleged due process violation and the improper handling of the burden of proof during the initial hearing.

The outcome of this petition will determine whether Siemionkowicz remains detained while her broader immigration proceedings continue or if she will have another opportunity to seek release through a properly conducted bond hearing. The case highlights significant questions about due process and the government’s responsibilities in immigration detention proceedings.

Frequently Asked Questions